Trump's infrastructure plan and the ATL (Macon: rent, neighborhood, buying)

[tikigod311]

Federal funding is not the only mechanism to fund rail. If there was less burden in regards to federal taxes, we could fund things more fully on a local level which I would strongly prefer. The Feds have certainly has helped in the past and I don't regard them as evil or wrong as many do. But I'm tired of everything being thrown up on a Federal level where you, me or anyone w/o money can't change a thing. I'm all about campaign finance reform but even if that was perfect it wouldn't fix the problem. That's why I generally support neutering the federal government

But yeah, I'm a realist. I would have much rather be dealing w/ Hillary's budget right now.

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by tikigod311

Federal funding is not the only mechanism to fund rail. If there was less burden in regards to federal taxes, we could fund things more fully on a local level which I would strongly prefer. The Feds have certainly has helped in the past and I don't regard them as evil or wrong as many do. But I'm tired of everything being thrown up on a Federal level where you, me or anyone w/o money can't change a thing. I'm all about campaign finance reform but even if that was perfect it wouldn't fix the problem. That's why I generally support neutering the federal government

But yeah, I'm a realist. I would have much rather be dealing w/ Hillary's budget right now.

But only for some states. Those states who could least handle the transition to the purely local funding mechanism, are the very ones who need the economic development that comes with those projects the most.

They're also, coincidentally, the states least likely to have their states' government be benevolent in 'returning' those funds.

[tikigod311]

It's a good point and something significant to consider, I just don't think it's worth it. But I'm talking ideologically. I want things to work out for the best and that rarely works with being a steadfast idealist.

[fourthwarden]

Here's a radical idea: Let's stick to this administration's stated goal of improving infrastructure and, actually improve infrastructure. Instead of defunding Amtrak, let's actually icrease the funding past starvation levels. Let's get a few more long-haul services up, and then concentrate heavily on the regional services.

I think this is a good guide:





Instead of this:

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by fourthwarden

Here's a radical idea: Let's stick to this administration's stated goal of improving infrastructure and, actually improve infrastructure. Instead of defunding Amtrak, let's actually icrease the funding past starvation levels. Let's get a few more long-haul services up, and then concentrate heavily on the regional services.

I think this is a good guide:





Instead of this:

It's a shame that NC can fund state-supported, intercity, Amtrak service and GA has nothing.

[MikeHonchoATL]

Originally Posted by fourthwarden

Here's a radical idea: Let's stick to this administration's stated goal of improving infrastructure and, actually improve infrastructure. Instead of defunding Amtrak, let's actually icrease the funding past starvation levels. Let's get a few more long-haul services up, and then concentrate heavily on the regional services.

I think this is a good guide:





Instead of this:

Improve it. Trim the fat. Focus on the areas that make sense. Simply running large amounts of unprofitable, largely unridden routes does not make sense.

I'd rather have good, fast service where it makes sense than large amounts of garbage like we do now.

Think, son.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by MikeHonchoATL

Improve it. Trim the fat. Focus on the areas that make sense. Simply running large amounts of unprofitable, largely unridden routes does not make sense.

I'd rather have good, fast service where it makes sense than large amounts of garbage like we do now.

Think, son.

Agreed. Most of Amtrak is a vast waste of resources that could be spent on useful infrastructure, not nostalgic trains for people who don't want to fly or ride the bus. Think of how much good all those billions could have been done if spent upgrading the useful routes or making the potentially useful routes actually useful.

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by bu2

Agreed. Most of Amtrak is a vast waste of resources that could be spent on useful infrastructure, not nostalgic trains for people who don't want to fly or ride the bus. Think of how much good all those billions could have been done if spent upgrading the useful routes or making the potentially useful routes actually useful.

That's not why Amtrak serves long-distance, money losing routes. I hope this explains better: https://youtu.be/fwjwePe-HmA

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by MikeHonchoATL

Improve it. Trim the fat. Focus on the areas that make sense. Simply running large amounts of unprofitable, largely unridden routes does not make sense.

I'd rather have good, fast service where it makes sense than large amounts of garbage like we do now.

Think, son.

Originally Posted by bu2

Agreed. Most of Amtrak is a vast waste of resources that could be spent on useful infrastructure, not nostalgic trains for people who don't want to fly or ride the bus.

The long-haul trains are the entire point Amtrak was made in the first place: a social service to maintain a rail link for those who would loose it if passenger rail is expected to be 100% profitable on its own. I am thinking, and I'm thinking the comparative pittance of funding that Amtrak gets to maintain the long-haul routes compared to budget increases for defense, or how much the highways get, is not enough to justify its cut as a 'cost savings' move.

Barely anything is saved, and so much is lost.


We, HAVE the resources available to us in this country to keep the long-haul routes open, AND improve regional rail. We HAVE the resources available to add new long-haul AND nodal AND corridor routes.

We could have it all, we have the resources, if only we actually bothered to do so, but no. That would make some very wealthy people slightly less wealthy, and we can't have that, now can we?

Originally Posted by bu2

Think of how much good all those billions could have been done if spent upgrading the useful routes or making the potentially useful routes actually useful.

Except that's not what's happening. 'All those billions' are just going away, not going to help improve any other route. Besides, think how much could have been done if all those billions spent on economically unsustainable road networks were put into national and local rail instead.

Still, this is a false equivalence. We CAN have it all, if only we actually tried.

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by bu2

Agreed. Most of Amtrak is a vast waste of resources that could be spent on useful infrastructure, not nostalgic trains for people who don't want to fly or ride the bus. Think of how much good all those billions could have been done if spent upgrading the useful routes or making the potentially useful routes actually useful.

The feds subsidize airline travel to regional and smaller airports, should they stop that as well and leave those cities disconnected?